On Tue, 17 Oct 2000 at 12:29, Chris Waters wrote about "Re: All services...":
> it. The init.d scripts are for starting and stopping daemons, not for
> reporting on their linkage. Note that I didn't say "smaller", I said,
> "cleaner" and "less confusing".
Excuse me if I don't understand things
On Tue, 17 Oct 2000 at 12:54, Chris Waters wrote about "Re: All services...":
> > IMHO libc should handle its various incompatibilies itself, because
> > its a problem in libc, not in the daemon packages.
>
> I almost agree with you, but I think that trying to get libc to track
> all the packages
Joey Hess wrote:
> Anthony Towns wrote:
>
> > doc
> > - eh?? i have to go out of my way to get "General documentation"??
>
> I think I agree with all of these. We should file bugs to get them
> removed.
I don't understand. If you remove task-doc from the list of task
packages that user
> From: Joey Hess [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Anthony Towns wrote:
> > The *task* is really "usable 2d windowing environment for accessing
> > programs", it's not kde, or gnome, or xlib, or motif. Is it really
> > sensible to have the choice between the various windowing toolkits
> > made here?
Peter S Galbraith schrieb:
> I don't understand. If you remove task-doc from the list of task
> packages that users can easily pick from, they _will_ have to go
> out of their way to get them installed individually as packages.
Well, may be renaming it to eg task-newbie would be another
solution.
While I mostly agree with Adam, there's one nit I'd like to pick:
On 14-Oct-00, 21:03 (CDT), Adam Di Carlo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * browsing the web (without having to download plugins all the
> > time, having java support, etc)
>
> Well, we do have virtual packages for this.
>
On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 12:06:58PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> Yes, task-webserver-roxen should not exist. I have written about this
> before. "I want a web server" is a suitable task, "I want web server
> foo" is not.
I think the problem we're seeing is this: the 'task-' package
namespace is magi
On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, Chris Waters wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 12:31:18PM +0200, Roland Rosenfeld wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Chris Waters wrote:
>
> > > set $(runlevel) # $2 is now current runlevel
> > > name=service
> > > rcfile=/etc/rc$2.d/S??$name
>
> > > test -f $rcfile &
On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 01:21:06PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > we haven't a script to find out whether a daemon is running yet, but
> > > we should introduce one and fixate this in the policy).
> >
> > Yes, this would seem to be the only sane approach. (Other than
> > discarding fi
> >
> > E.g.:
> > objdump -T $( readlink -f /proc/$PID/exe ) | egrep 'symbol1|symbol2'
> >
> > The processes to restart could be taken from ps AND /etc/init.d/*.
>
> How would it know that it is a service as opposed to a running "ls" or
> cronjob? How would it know how to restart simple ex
> > > Ok, I'm tired of having to track all services that might need to be
> > > restarted after a libc6 upgrade. So here's what I am going to do. I want
> > > to require all packages that need this to declare a new reply in it's init
> > > script. It's very simple, I check your init script like thi
11 matches
Mail list logo
